Remember when you posted that chain email as a thread? lol adios! Never change

For the 3rd time I didn't quote a slogan.

Right bringing up 'allies/appeasers of the Nazis' in no way insinuates racism. Hey guys it's super easy to argue politics, let's just call our opponents Nazis! I am now fully convinced you are not only an inconsiderate fool, but a liar as well.

And you were dead wrong.

Nice backpedal/evasion. The one idea everyone shared was 'America First' (by keeping it out of the war).

uggg

Lol. First you say "America First" fought the Nazis. They didn't. They opposed the war with Germany. You are sooo clearly wrong and making **** up that you're clearly not worth talking to as you can't understand it or are being disingenuous.

Now you're arguing that they weren't racist? That's a bold argument from someone who didn't even understand the cartoon. There were certainly pacifists opposed to the war and some in the America First movement. It's most prominent member, not so much.

I didn't say that. I said the sentiment of 'America first' beat the Nazis, and the Soviets. This is poignantly elucidated by what happened to America First when the United States went to war. They closed up shop and jumped on the pro-war bandwagon. America first!

I don't care about the America First movement. Why do you keep bringing it up?

What is your evidence that they were? Again, I wasn't talking about the movement from the 30's.

America First was a pacifist movement, you buffoon. Charles Lindbergh was a pacifist. Charles Lindbergh secretly divulged what he knew about the Luftwaffe to the US Armed Forces. Charles Lindbergh then supported the United States when it went to war after Dec. 7, 1941. Sounds like a Nazi supporting racist to me. Read the wiki on it (you won't). Also I would say Gerald Ford and John F. Kennedy were more prominent supporters than Charles Lindbergh.

[/QUOTE]

Ya I could post pictures of many world leaders and famous people with Hitler, does that make them all Nazi supporters?

Regardless, I don't even know why we are talking about this because I was never talking about this movement!

DoOrDoNot,

On the one in a million chance that you're not doing this intentionally you could just admit that you didn't understand the cartoon at first.

Are you so ****ing stupid as to equate wars with political assassination?

I can't even dignify your lunacy with any more response.

Doing what intentionally?

He equated nationalist sentiment now with a pacifist movement from 70 years ago (because he read an article on Salon--he's nowhere near smart enough for nuanced deception), so I don't doubt it.

walk it off mother****er

But america has done well under globalist trade policies. It's the poor who've gotten ****ed, largely because of politicians who're anti tax/redistribution... which has always been an essential part of making it work.

The question of whether free trade + tax / distribution is more efficient/effective than trade protectionism is maybe worthy of consideration, but it has nothing to do with putting america first.

It's more a matter of class warfare, driven by the governments (republicans) attempt to limit or rescind benefits to the people who've been hurt by it.

I'm not equating them. Trump's murder of innocent civilians in an illegal war is far worse than Clinton's imaginary assassinations.

Even if you are bizarrely quoting a cartoon about one movement and then using the same phrase to refer to a different movement, you can't blame OTHER people for the confusion.

America, **** Yeah! was much better: peak nationalistic sentiment.

I'd argue against this vehemently. The middle class has gotten absolutely crushed. Globalist policies have been great for people like me. The investor/professional class has done awesome. High skilled labor? You have it all. Rising 401k and investments, rising house values, you have healthcare and job security. The only thing you really worry about is college tuition, but you plan that out and save.

Yeah. If you're an engineer and you marry a nurse when you guys are 26 years old, have 2 kids and live in a nice neighborhood? Yep. America is great.

Now go through the same exercise with a guy working construction making 18 dollars an hour married to a secretary making 17 dollars an hour. How have globalist policies helped them? If they lived in an ok neighborhood before they got pushed out due to the rising rents in cities across the country. Job security? Lol. 401k? Please. Healthcare? Hopefully one of them has benefits, but it probably doesn't even cover dental. Save to buy a house? Out of the question, when it's 300k to even start to find something decent. College? Lol, yeah, ok.

I went to a matinee a few weeks to watch alien covenant and somehow managed to spend 25 bucks. Christ, a cheesesteak is 10 dollars now. 10 dollars!

I really think many of you fail to see how stressful and hard it is for middle class people to make it. They are under siege in every category. Food, energy costs, schooling, insurance. Everything is a goddamn fortune these days. And what did the middle class get? Bad neighborhoods with cricket wireless stores and fried chicken joints.

It's a goddamn travesty. Open your eyes and look around you. Look at the bus stops. Look at the people working at the fast food joints. The middle class hasn't gotten a raise in what? 35 years?

It's a ****ing disgrace.

About 75% of the population disagree with you. 50% voted for Trump and the other 25% would have voted for Bernie.

Only half the pop voted at all.

75% of the population that voted. Obviously that was implied because everyone knows only 50% of the total population voted.

I'll make sure and spell things out slowly and deliberately from now on for you

So wil says he'd argue against and then goes on to agree for 100s of words?

I don't even know what's going on anymore in this forum

Thanks.

More low-income people than not think that free trade has helped their financial situation; this is also true of the total population of the US.

I'll admit that's disturbing. I'll work on it when I'm sober.

Have we talked about the recent WSJ story in this forum at all yet? Is it a nothingburger and/or fake news?

WSJ is, irritatingly, the most paywalled news site on the web as far as I can tell, so I still haven't read the original article, just what everyone else has been saying about it.

Links from Twitter still work:



https://twitter.com/shaneharris/stat...36545601748999

Dude. Can you stop spamming the forum with your Twitter idiocy?

Wtf now? Can the mods do something about his constant tweets?